Citizenship in violent contexts

For many people, the possibilities of participation - in policy processes or mobilising for claiming rights - are highly constrained by violence in their everyday lives. Violence is increasingly pervasive not only in countries labelled as ‘fragile states’, but for large populations of countries seen as having strong states, such as Brazil, India and even Nigeria.

Yet work on citizenship and citizen action rarely engages with issues of violence directly, and work on violence tends to focus on debates on human or state security. A group of researchers with the DRC are exploring violence, citizenship and participation and are asking questions such as how do/can people begin processes of participatory social action in contexts of violence? What kind of social action reduces and or prevents violence? What kind of social action contributes to citizenship in violent contexts? How can our research contribute to peaceful social transformation?

Researchers are working in four different countries ( Brazil , Jamaica , Mexico and Nigeria ) and they address a variety of issues, from urban and youth violence ( Jamaica , Brazil and Nigeria ) to religious conflicts ( Nigeria ), militias and vigilantes ( Brazil , Jamaica and Nigeria ) and gender and violence ( Mexico and Nigeria ). Additional background work has been done by Jenny Pearce, from the Peace Studies Centre in Bradford , drawing from Guatemala and Colombia.

A major contribution of the group will be on the use of multiple methods in researching – and acting upon – violence. Stories from different contexts show that working in conflict environments requires a need for researchers to be open and reassure communities of their motives; and to encourage participation to ensure community ownership and sustained action after the research. This type of communication is integral to the process because it enhances understanding between researcher and community members.

The research is producing many insights into the causes of violence, with important policy implications. In the current environment, a main approach to dealing with violence and conflict involves strengthening states, which are perceived to be fragile. Yet, in many of these settings, state and political violence are themselves deeply engrained in, and highly linked to, community level violence as well.

In Nigeria for instance, community identities and divisions around religion, ethnicity were used and exploited in recent political violence at the time of the election. In Jamaica, local ‘dons’, and gangs, play a role not only in drugs and arms trafficking, but are deeply linked to parties and political power as well.

Many causes of violence are deeply related to other forms of social, political and economic exclusion. Where the state is unable or unwilling to provide equitable and responsive treatment to its citizens, youth and others gravitate towards alternative, parallel structures, be it through the militias in Brazil or the ‘gangsters’ in the community in Jamaica. These alternative structures then claim to promoting social action on behalf of community interests then claim more legitimacy than the state itself. They become strong forces in mediating state-citizen relations.

At the same time, emerging case studies have begun to illustrate how social action can be used and for the reduction of everyday violence. Jenny Pearce’s work in Guatemala and Colombia , for instance, suggests that, “civil society organisations… can potentially have a direct influence on violence. They can encourage victims to overcome fear…They bring people together to make violences visible public and political problems. By disseminating a sense of rights, civil society organisations enable people to feel they can legitimately challenge violent actors, as well as those who use dominating power over them.” The future work of the group will continue to explore participatory social action can strengthen full citizenship and reduce violence in everyday life.